Hubert Dreyfus (English Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Hubert Dreyfus" in English language version.

refsWebsite
Global rank English rank
5th place
5th place
1st place
1st place
2nd place
2nd place
3rd place
3rd place
2,387th place
1,479th place
6th place
6th place
580th place
462nd place
8,382nd place
5,224th place
low place
low place
9th place
13th place
7th place
7th place
462nd place
345th place
low place
low place
325th place
255th place
low place
low place
low place
low place
613th place
456th place
1,865th place
1,260th place
2,921st place
2,118th place
3,464th place
2,377th place
low place
low place
230th place
214th place
low place
low place
1,785th place
1,133rd place
8,222nd place
8,022nd place
18th place
17th place

amacad.org

archive.org

  • Magee, Bryan (1988). The Great Philosophers: An Introduction to Western Philosophy. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 275. ISBN 9780192822017. OL 2043183M. Sartre started out as a Husserlian, and as a phenomenologist he wrote a good novel called Nausea, which is a first-person description of a person's world breaking down. Then he read Heidegger and was converted to what he thought was Heideggerian existentialism. But as a Husserlian and a Frenchman he felt he had to fix up Heidegger and make him more Cartesian. So he starts with the individual conscious subject, but writes about Death, Anxiety, lnauthenticity, Being and Nothing - all the things that Heidegger talks about. The result, Being and Nothingness, is a brilliant misunderstanding of Being and Time. If the story that we've been telling is right, Heidegger was precisely trying to free us from our Cartesian assumptions. When I went to visit Heidegger he had Being and Nothingness on his desk, in German translation, and I said, 'So you're reading Sartre?, and he responded, 'How can I even begin to read this muck?' (His word was 'Dreck'.) That's pretty strong, but I think accurate, since if you treat Heidegger as if he were talking about subjects you turn him back into Husserl.
  • Crevier, Daniel (1993). AI : the tumultuous history of the search for artificial intelligence. New York: Basic Books. pp. 125. ISBN 0465029973. OCLC 26858345.

atworldsend.co

au.dk

psy.au.dk

berkeley.edu

news.berkeley.edu

sophos.berkeley.edu

books.google.com

brooklynfilmfestival.org

carlkorsnes.com

dailynous.com

doi.org

encyclopedia.com

filosofisksupplement.no

harvard.edu

scholar.harvard.edu

nd.edu

ndpr.nd.edu

nybooks.com

nytimes.com

openlibrary.org

  • Magee, Bryan (1988). The Great Philosophers: An Introduction to Western Philosophy. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 275. ISBN 9780192822017. OL 2043183M. Sartre started out as a Husserlian, and as a phenomenologist he wrote a good novel called Nausea, which is a first-person description of a person's world breaking down. Then he read Heidegger and was converted to what he thought was Heideggerian existentialism. But as a Husserlian and a Frenchman he felt he had to fix up Heidegger and make him more Cartesian. So he starts with the individual conscious subject, but writes about Death, Anxiety, lnauthenticity, Being and Nothing - all the things that Heidegger talks about. The result, Being and Nothingness, is a brilliant misunderstanding of Being and Time. If the story that we've been telling is right, Heidegger was precisely trying to free us from our Cartesian assumptions. When I went to visit Heidegger he had Being and Nothingness on his desk, in German translation, and I said, 'So you're reading Sartre?, and he responded, 'How can I even begin to read this muck?' (His word was 'Dreck'.) That's pretty strong, but I think accurate, since if you treat Heidegger as if he were talking about subjects you turn him back into Husserl.

ox.ac.uk

fhi.ox.ac.uk

oxfordscholarship.com

philpapers.org

rand.org

spiked-online.com

uchicago.edu

philosophy.uchicago.edu

web.archive.org

worldcat.org

youtube.com